Dated: 17.03.2023

O R D E R

BY HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

1. This Appeal filed by Complainant under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, aggrieved by an order dated 14.08.2019, passed in CC/89/2017 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mysore (herein after referred as District Forum/Commission and the parties arrayed as in the consumer complaint).

2. Commission examined grounds of appeal, impugned order and heard learned counsels for appellant.   

3. Learned counsel for appellant submits that Commission below erroneously passed the impugned order by dismissing the complaint as time barred by not considering the facts of the case and has failed to take note of the procedure laid down in the Consumer Protection Act in its pith and substance.  The Forum below noted that cause of action to file consumer complaint arose on 16.02.2015 when the endorsement issued by OP1 and OP2 and as per Section 24-A of Limitation Act the complaint ought to have been filed on or before the expiry of two years from the date of cause of action arose i.e., before 16.02.2017, but the present complaint is filed on 22.03.2017 i.e., 34 days delay.  As such dismissed the complaint.  It is to be noted herein that complainant/appellant himself has stated in the complaint that on 24.03.2015 he came to know that the MUDA had not considered his request for retention of the present site and was unaware about the fact of  issuance of endorsement by OP1 and OP2/respondent no.1 and 2 on 16.02.2015. No doubt as per Section 24–A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.  But a complaint may be entertained after the period specified, if the complainant satisfied the District Forum, the State Commission of the National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within limitation.  In our view, the provision of limitation in the Consumer Protection Act cannot be strictly construed to disadvantage a consumer.  If found delay in filing the complaint the Forum below could have asked the reasons for the same to the complainant before passing the impugned order.  In such view of the matter, we deem it fit to remand this matter to the Commission below to decide the case on merits by giving opportunity to both the parties.  Accordingly, the impugned order dated 14.08.2019 passed in CC/89/2017 is hereby set aside and remanded the matter to Commission below to decide the matter in accordance with law and decide as early as possible not later than three months from the date of receipt of this order by affording opportunity to both parties.

4. Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties to the appeal.

Lady Member                                         Judicial Member                                 President

*GGH*